Appeal No. 1998-2992
Application No. 08/539,276
Reference is made to the brief and the answer for the 1
respective positions of the appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
All of the rejections are reversed.
All of the claims on appeal state that the first antenna
and the second antenna “do not simultaneously transmit data to
said subscriber station.” The examiner contends (answer, page
9) that “Dean, discloses the signal transmitted from different
antennas, as shown in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3, at different times
which means signals are not simultaneously transmitted.” The
appellants argue (brief, pages 2, 3 and 12) that the short
delay of the delay device used in Dean causes the antennas to
transmit the same signal substantially simultaneously to a
subscriber receiver.
In Dean, an analog transmitter 120 located in base
station 100 transmits the same signal over two different
distribution cables 130 and 132 and two different antennas
located in node 200A (Figure 2). The signal that travels via
cable 130 is delayed with respect to the signal that travels
1The statements of the rejections omit claims 57 and 115.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007